Occupations:
I have had many jobs and titles throughout my life so far including:
A lawyer, a diplomat, a professor of tactics, editor of the Democratic newspaper (Daily Enquirer), represented Vanderburg County in the state legislature, lieutenant colonel and colonel of the Indiana Volunteers, and Minister to China.
Reasons for Interest:
In September 1898 I was appointed a member of the committee, which investigated the conduct of the war with Spain and the next year I was appointed as a member of the Philippine Commission. I was a delegate to the St. Louis and Chicago Democratic Conventions. I received many complimentary resolutions from various missionary boards in the United States and China. My overall involvements with foreign nations, several conventions and committees, and with President McKinley have provided me with a strong interest in our actions regarding the Philippine annexation.
Position on Issue: The world has moved and circumstances are changed. We have become a great people and we have a great commerce to take care of. We have to compete with the commercial nations of the world in far-distant markets. Commerce, not politics, is king.
We have the right as conquerors to hold the Philippines. All nations have recognized that the conquerors may dictate the terms of peace. I am in favor of holding the Philippines because I cannot conceive any alternative to doing so. The Philippines are a foothold for us in the Far East and if we give up the Philippines, we throw away the great opportunity to assert our influence there. Their possession gives us standing and influence. It gives us valuable trade in exports and imports. There was no purpose in the conquest of Manila unless we intend to hold it. By holding the Philippines we prevent at least a general European War.
There is no reason why we cannot administer the Philippines in a manner satisfactory to their people as well as to ourselves. If it could be ascertained today that no army would be necessary to safeguard the Philippines, opposition to their annexation would be greatly diminished. I do not believe that a large army will be necessary in the Philippines and I am sure that native troops would serve all purposes.
References:
On April 4th 1898 I have participated with other members of the Commission including:
Jacob Gould Schurman
Dean C. Worcester
Admiral George Dewey
General Elwell S. Otis
Work Cited -----
"Charles Denby."Dictionary of American Biography Base Set. American Council of Learned Societies, 1928-1936. Reproduced in History Resource Center. Farmington Hills, MI: Gale. http://galenet.galegroup.com/servlet/HistRC/
Charles Denby
Occupations:
I have had many jobs and titles throughout my life so far including:
A lawyer, a diplomat, a professor of tactics, editor of the Democratic newspaper (Daily Enquirer), represented Vanderburg County in the state legislature, lieutenant colonel and colonel of the Indiana Volunteers, and Minister to China.
Reasons for Interest:
In September 1898 I was appointed a member of the committee, which investigated the conduct of the war with Spain and the next year I was appointed as a member of the Philippine Commission. I was a delegate to the St. Louis and Chicago Democratic Conventions. I received many complimentary resolutions from various missionary boards in the United States and China. My overall involvements with foreign nations, several conventions and committees, and with President McKinley have provided me with a strong interest in our actions regarding the Philippine annexation.
Position on Issue:
The world has moved and circumstances are changed. We have become a great people and we have a great commerce to take care of. We have to compete with the commercial nations of the world in far-distant markets. Commerce, not politics, is king.
We have the right as conquerors to hold the Philippines. All nations have recognized that the conquerors may dictate the terms of peace. I am in favor of holding the Philippines because I cannot conceive any alternative to doing so. The Philippines are a foothold for us in the Far East and if we give up the Philippines, we throw away the great opportunity to assert our influence there. Their possession gives us standing and influence. It gives us valuable trade in exports and imports. There was no purpose in the conquest of Manila unless we intend to hold it. By holding the Philippines we prevent at least a general European War.
There is no reason why we cannot administer the Philippines in a manner satisfactory to their people as well as to ourselves. If it could be ascertained today that no army would be necessary to safeguard the Philippines, opposition to their annexation would be greatly diminished. I do not believe that a large army will be necessary in the Philippines and I am sure that native troops would serve all purposes.
References:
On April 4th 1898 I have participated with other members of the Commission including:
Jacob Gould Schurman
Dean C. Worcester
Admiral George Dewey
General Elwell S. Otis
Work Cited -----
"Charles Denby."Dictionary of American Biography Base Set. American Council of Learned Societies, 1928-1936. Reproduced in History Resource Center. Farmington Hills, MI: Gale. http://galenet.galegroup.com/servlet/HistRC/
Morrison I. Swift " Imperialism and the Threat to Liberty," Annals of American History. [Accessed March 28, 2010].
<http://america.eb.com/america/article?articleId=386580&query=**Senator**+**Henry**+**Cabot**+**Lodge**>
Charles Denby " The Evident Fitness of Keeping the Philippines," Annals of American History. [Accessed March 28, 2010].
<http://america.eb.com/america/article?articleId=386581&query=**charles**+**denby**>